The Denver Post editorial board wants to continue the march to marriage equality by overturning Colorado’s gay marriage ban. Where will the march end? Who decides when it ends? Will it continue to allow a man to marry a woman and her mother? This equality drumbeat disregards human nature: created in God’s image but marred by man’s own rebellion and depravity.

What the editors call “this discriminatory slice of history” is from the beginning when marriage was created by God and not cultural standards. This editorial demand also ignores the history of Rome, Athens, Sodom and Gomorrah, where there was moral implosion with drastic consequences.

The family of a husband and wife is the best for children and the basis for society. The only other option is everyone doing what is best in their own eyes, which will continue the march to societal chaos.

Jay and Dianne Moyers, Centennial

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

The Alliance Defending Freedom says traditional couples will be less likely to marry or stay together if marriage became a genderless union. Nonsense! My husband and I are “traditional” and have been married for 27 years. We are friends with gay people, some who have been in relationships longer than ours. Our marriage is under no threat, either from gay or traditional marriages. Does the Alliance worry about “traditional” couples who divorce? Surely the high divorce rate among traditional couples causes some people to worry about marrying.

All of us should focus on our own relationships rather than trying to control others’ personal lives.

Dixie J-Elder, Longmont

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

Conservatives were wrong on slavery. And then wrong on the right of women to vote, and later on equal rights. They were wrong on civil rights. They were wrong to oppose interracial marriage. And now they are just as wrong on gay rights, including the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry. When has denying someone their rights ever been right?

James DeGregori, Denver

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

President Barack Obama speaks about how having a fuel-efficient truck fleet can boost the economy and help combat climate change on Feb. 18 in Upper Marlboro, Md. (Jacquelyn Martin, The Associated Press)

If by “unsettled” he means that the magnitude and details of human-caused global warming effects are uncertain, he’s correct. Conditions may turn out differently, perhaps much worse, than models predict from an anticipated temperatfure rise of about 6 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100. Otherwise, there’s no scientific controversy.

No warming since 1998? June 2009 to May 2010 was the hottest 12-month period on record. Nature doesn’t follow our calendar. Better satellite data from Arctic and Antarctic regions indicate that recent global temperature increases are much larger than previous estimates.

Krauthammer should “unsettle” his mind. We need Cassandras. I guess he’s forgotten that Cassandra proved right and Troy burned.

Thomas R. Johnson, Denver

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

Charles Krauthammer’s column made me gasp for breath. He asserts that we don’t know whether climate change is actually happening or what its consequences may be.

We don’t know whether al-Qaeda will make another attempt to terrorize our nation or what it will be, but we would be remiss not to take whatever steps we can to deal with this imminent threat. And climate change is the most dire threat to the human race, not just to the U.S.

Get some perspective, dear sir, and stop helping obstructionists get in the way of science.

Susan Permut, Monument

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Your article states that James Bergman, a convicted violent criminal, murdered his cellmate of one day, Lyle White. After White was beaten to death, Bergman spent several months in solitary confinement without an attorney’s consultation.

While due process was served, I have little empathy or concern for the duration of time (nine months) until charges were filed. I could not believe the audacity of Bergman to complain about his solitary confinement: “… I’m still sitting in a cell alone. I wasn’t a priority.” Huh? Doesn’t common sense dictate that maybe someone who kills his cellmate belongs alone in a cell?

As usual, the taxpayers are also on the hook for the cost of prosecuting defendants already in prison.

I’m sorry, but anyone sympathetic to these poor convicts’ plight has their priorities confused.

Michael Corboy, Wheat Ridge

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

Your recent coverage of prisoners in Colorado’s corrections system seems to ignore the reason why these people are there to begin with.

The issue is that the main objective of the penal system is to protect the public from criminals.

We live in a state where no one is safe from violent prison gangs — not prison officials, judges, prosecutors and certainly not the public.

It is the law-abiding citizens of this state who deserve the protection of their basic rights.

Mark Rohrer, Westminster

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Nate Easley perpetuates the myth that the “average student in Colorado spends less than 1.3 percent of his time taking state tests.”

For every test, hours are spent on preparation. For example, to prepare for state tests, my district designed quarterly tests, which count as grades. Teachers devote daily class time reviewing the skills that will be tested, so these state tests generate yet more tests, each of which generate more preparation. Granfted, many of these skills are worth teaching, but much time is devoted to test-taking strategies like practice with filling in bubble sheets and completing all questions in the allotted time.

In presenting this disingenuous argument, Easley casts doubt on his own credibility.

Don Batt, Denver

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Bob Garfield’s gushing love letter to big government reminded me of a bar patron’s lack of discernment when looking for companionship at closing time. Garfield’s list lacks understanding of the proper role of government and at what level problems are best dealt with. He ignores regulatory capture and rent-seeking when government deals with commerce. He thinks government services are “mostly free.” He claims government solves problems rather than contributes to them. (The New Deal actually prolonged the Great Depression.) He does not hold government accountable for its spending, inflation and debt.

Garfield exhibits that tiresome combination of hubris that disdains markets while taking delight in spending other people’s money on pet progressive ideas. The market offends progressives because it requires them to be measured by their lessers. Unfortunately, Garfield’s slobbering affection can’t find a balance between prudent governmental affairs and allowing people to deal with problems on their own.

Michael D. Fisher, Centennial

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

The magnificent video referenced in Jeremy Meyer’s column is yet another reason to challenge the proposal by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to de-list the gray wolf from federal protection under the Endangered Species Act. The release of this video follows a major setback to this proposal when an independent peer-review panel recently concluded that the scientific evidence put forth by the government was insufficient, and not based upon settled science.

Colorado has excellent habitat for wolves, and the ecosystems within Rocky Mountain National Park and around our state would surely benefit from the reintroduction of wolves. It is time, after a century of hatred and fear, to recognize the importance of this keystone species to the health and recovery of the mountains, rivers and wilderness that we who are fortunate enough to live in Colorado all hold dear.

Delia Malone, RedstoneGail Bell, Denver

Delia Malone is Wildlife Committee chair for the Rocky Mountain chapter of the Sierra Club. Gail Bell is co-chair.

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

Jeremy Meyer quotes science writer George Monbiot saying: “I’ve often wondered why people are so hostile to wolves. I suspect that we fear them because they remind us of ourselves.” Uh, no. We fear them for the same reason we fear sharks and grizzly bears: because they eat us.

I vote “no” on bringing wolves to Colorado. Duh.

Jacques Voorhees, Keystone

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

A skier starts to head down the Prima Cornice run at the Vail Resort on March 13, 2013. (Andy Cross, The Denver Post)

I have been coming to ski in Vail at Lionshead Village for the past 43 years, first with my daughter and now alone. I am 91 years old. I love the experience, but there is something that bothers me.

The White River National Forest area is sustained through taxpayer dollars, but many taxpayers can no longer afford to ski Vail. Daily rates exceed $150 for a single lift ticket and rental equipment.

What has happened over the years saddens me. Locally owned establishments that were so compatible with the natural surroundings and had reasonable prices have been torn down and replaced with multimillion-dollar structures, owned by rich out-of-state investors who charge outrageous prices for lodging and food.

Come on! Making money is one thing, but greed is quite another.

Vlasta Giese, Portland, Ore.

This letter was published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledges the applause of the crowd as he is introduced at the closing ceremony of the 2014 Winter Olympics on Feb. 23 in Sochi, Russia. (AP Photo/David Goldman, Pool)

Olympic observation: I wonder what it takes to light a fire under Vladimir Putin. Sure seemed he was bored to tears during opening ceremonies, the competition and the closing ceremonies. I’ll bet he’s a barrel of laughs at a party!

Carole Bolduc, Lakewood

Imagine a civilized nation with a proud history in which a growing minority of its increasingly oppressed citizens topples its lawless rulers in a forceful but minimally violent revolution. God bless the Ukrainian liberators and freedom-loving people the world over.

Don Gallo, Golden

These letters were published in the March 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.

To reach the Denver Post editorial page by phone: 303-954-1331

Recent Comments

peterpi: I think I have this correct: Voters in Jefferson County elected school board members that the superintendent...

peterpi: Sounds good to me. For future employees. I believe police and fire dept. brass have also been known to get...